7
7Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Mercury Chamber Update Oct 2011 Comments on this Concept All bottom surfaces sloped for drainage Pool width maximized Splash & wave mitigation space and depth available Accommodates curved beam trajectory Loss of top and side tungsten shielding Resistive coil shielding would have to be a separate component Support of chamber and mercury required (~6ton) 83cm

11
11Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Mercury Chamber Update Oct 2011 Nozzle Cartridge Nozzle module placement critical to facility operations – Repeatable and rugged design required for remote operations Long slender pipes don’t lend themselves to this scheme NOT THIS WELDMENT CONCEPT MACHINED BLOCK(S) FOR RIGIDITY AND ACCURACY Could also implement via “cartridges” which insert into the larger block Cooling will be needed Drainage system implemented in similar fashion Provides some structural support for remote handling Must also provide space for resistive coil utilities

17
17Managed by UT-Battelle for the U.S. Department of Energy Mercury Chamber Update Oct 2011 Mercury Chamber Wish List Eliminate resistive coils Enlarge resistive coils such that a cylindrical mercury chamber can be pulled through them If above not possible, then an integrated coil/chamber design required Minimize coil length of all upstream magnets